As I mentioned, U.S. Customs and Border Protection has stopped the aerial spraying of the herbicide, imazapyr, on the Carrizo cane along a 1.1-mile stretch of the Rio Grande riverbank, according to the Laredo Morning Times.

Border Patrol was hoping to eliminate the invasive Carrizo cane to improve the visibility along the border. The plan was to defoliate the area that was reminiscent to a tactic used in Vietnam to remove forest cover for Viet Cong and North Vietnamese forces.

The project that was to begin yesterday was stopped indefinitely over concerns raised by both sides of the border. Not surprisingly, Border Patrol claims they halted operations because of the concerns raised by the Mexican government officials. Roque Sarinana, a spokesman for the Border Patrol’s Laredo Sector, said that date has been pushed back to allow for further negotiations with Mexico.

It seems Border Patrol didn’t anticipate that people from both sides of the Rio Grande would be outraged over the spraying. Once word got around and the press got hold of the story, there was they could do but give. To counter, Border Patrol sought intergovernmental reinforcement to answer concerns whether the herbicide imazapyr poses an ecological and/or human threat.

The US Environmental Protection Agency claims there are no reason for concern from aggregate exposure to imazapyr residues. Although imazapyr is relatively nontoxic via the oral route of exposure, it is, however, slightly toxic if your skin comes into contact or it is inhaled.

EPA’s assessment is somewhat troubling. In the US, the herbicide as considered low-risk, however, outside the US, other countries do not come up with the same conclusion. The Laredo Morning Times reported that Mexico considers imazapyr to be medium risk, and in 2003, the European Union banned use of the herbicide.

Herbicides are most frequently implicated as the cause of fatal pesticide poisoning. There is hardly any information concerning the toxicity in humans after ingestion of herbicides containing imazapyr. However, I was able to find one study that challenges EPA’s findings.

In 2005, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) News, reported that the Canadian Department of National Defense and the US military used portions of the Canadian Forces Base (CFB), Gagetown, New Brunswick as a testing ground for the defoliants Agent Orange and Agent Purple during the 1960s. What makes this investigative report intriguing, the DND hired an independent contractor, Cantox Environmental, to determine whether exposures to the herbicides and their associated contaminants may be potential risks to human health and the environment. Interestingly, imazapyr was once of the herbicides Cantox investigated.

In Cantox’s Imazapyr profile, one of their findings refutes a claim that EPA made about imazapyr. EPA is on record saying that imazapyr is relatively nontoxic if swallowed, however, under the heading Toxicological Summary, Cantox cites a study that says otherwise:

During 1993 to 1997, six cases of acute poisoning with Arsenal (active ingredient imazapyr) occurred (Lee et al., 1999). Of the six cases, five were suicide attempts and one was an act of violence inflicted on a child. Three of the patients had severe symptoms including impairment of consciousness and respiratory distress. Other symptoms included metabolic acidosis, hypotension, leukocytosis, fever, mild elevation of hepatic tranaminase and creatinine, unconjugated hyperbilirubinemia, oral ulceration, pharyngolaryngitis, and chemical burns of the cornea (Lee et al., 1999). Mortality did not occur in any of the six cases. In general, toxic syndrome from Arsenal ingestion occurs at doses >100 mL. Effects include hypotension, pulmonary dysfunction, oral mucosal and gastrointestinal irritation, and transient liver and renal dysfunction (Lee et al., 1999).

This is very concerning. Cantox report was completed in 2007, yet, they could only find one human related study that was published in 1999. One has to wonder, if this product went through the US Food and Drug Administration, would it have received the green light to go the market? Probably not, so why did the EPA approve, while some countries banned it?

Considering there was very little to go on, Cantox had no other choice but use EPA as a source of information to complete the report. Canada’s Health department, Health Canada, expressed their concern for using EPA standards because what EPA considers “exposure estimates” were “not intended to represent the level of exposure in a population.” Yet, with the approval of EPA, Border Patrol was about to spray this toxic in a populated area as a pilot project. This is very reminiscent of the domestic human experiments our military conduct during the Cold War.

What caught my eye when I was researching this issue was a December 2008 press release by Forest Ethics.

Imazapyr is also used by [Sierra Pacific Industries] in their forestry practices. It has been shown to increase the number of brain and thyroid cancers in male rats and can be persistent in soil for up to a year. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has gone on record stating that imazapyr is a threat to endangered species in 24 states east of the Mississippi River. SPI has used almost 31,000 pounds of this chemical in the state.

This is interesting because, according to the Laredo Morning Times, the US Fish and Wildlife Service was another government agency that would have allowed the Border Patrol commence with their plan to use imazapyr to eradicated the Carrizo Cane.

Although imazapyr may indeed have a very low level of toxicity, EPA’s regulatory oversight for potential health risks from exposures to hazardous chemicals needs to be re-examined. This is further compounded by the lack of transparency by the company that produces imazapyr. For three governmental agencies to remains defiant despite mounting evidence is put innocent people in harms way.

If Border Patrol seeks to eradicate the Carrizo cane there are clearly other humane methods Border Patrol could have used, such as manually cutting the cane. Not only is this humane but it also achieves one of President Obama’s goal, putting people back to work.

President Barack Obama said his administration will “represent a clean break from business as usual.” However, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano is determined to go down the same road as her predecessor, Michael Chertoff, where her actions as justified as the end justifying any means, an attitude we have witnessed for the past 8 years.

While it has been delayed, but this is not good enough. The use of imazapyr in the United States must be stopped. There are many conflicting data on the effects of such widespread use of imazapyr. Most importantly, the citizens along the border should be not used as the governments Guinea pigs in the drug war.

Related posts

• Laredo’s ‘Agent Orange’ Controversy (19)
• Laredo’s “Agent Orange” Controversy Update (0)
• Guest Blogger Char Miller: Caning the Border Patrol (1)
• Reconquista!: A Nativists Creation (14)
• It Was Bound to Happen, National Guardsmen Shoot Up a Family Gathering (6)

Tags: border, Border Patrol, herbicides, Homeland Security, imazapyr, Immigration, pesticides, Texas |  Print This Post |
functional